Calcutta High Court
Haider Ali vs Musst. Gori Begum & Ors on 10 March, 2017
Author: Harish Tandon
Bench: Harish Tandon
ORDER SHEET
GA NO. 2706 OF 2016
RVWO No. 41 of 2016
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
ORIGINAL SIDE
HAIDER ALI
Versus
MUSST. GORI BEGUM & ORS.
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE HARISH TANDON
Date : 10th March, 2017.
Appearance:
Mr. Nilay Sengupta, Adv.
The Court :- The present review application is taken out against the order dated 8th June, 2016 passed in GA No.1574 of 2016 on the ground that the Advocate-on-Record could not apprise the Court that the fourth wife of late SK Kasem was the only daughter of Md. Kamil in whose name the property being Schedule X/3 was purchased and, therefore, the entire share devolved upon her.
Admittedly, the husband of the said daughter died during her life time. There was a categorical observation recorded in the said order dated 8th June, 2016 that once the property is admittedly purchased in the name of the father of the fourth wife, the exception provided under the Benami Transaction and Prohibition Act cannot apply. Merely on the aforesaid backdrop any litigant cannot invite the Court to review its own order. Furthermore, the Court has to go into the question of law, the devolution of interest and the inheritance of the said property after the death of the fourth wife. These are essentially a question 2 involved in the suit and, therefore, cannot be brought within the purview of Order 47 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The review of an order can be made on a patent error and not when the Court requires to meticulously examine the various documents and the pleadings and after making a roving enquiry to arrive whether the error is apparent on the face of the record.
The review jurisdiction is never meant for rewriting and/or revisiting the order nor can be used as a tool for reopening of the matter and permission to argue afresh.
This Court, therefore, does not find any ingredient and satisfying grounds provided under Order 47 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure in the instant case.
The review application is, thus, dismissed. No order as to costs.
(HARISH TANDON, J.) cs.